55 Comments. Add your own...

• 1. Patrick | March 3rd, 2009 at 2:13 am

  on a serious note: it is very sad that a beautiful woman like her is forced to marry a bastard like that. nothing in the world could convince me that she married him because of her own heart’s desire, not even her own words… how many muslim women have we all met, who felt that they’re in a prison with a man they did not want to marry, even if publicly they said they love him very much..

  poor girl.

• 2. Joe | March 3rd, 2009 at 3:43 am

  Les gouts et les couleurs ne se discutent pas.

• 3. partizan | March 3rd, 2009 at 5:07 am

  This guy has become a celebrity in Lebanon! How come? Uglier that this dude is right hard to find. The new fairy tale, kill a child and marry the a beauty!

• 4. js | March 3rd, 2009 at 6:26 am

  Good post. Sad story…te3tir ya dude walla te3tir

• 5. Rima | March 3rd, 2009 at 7:37 am

  If this woman has half a brain she wouldn’t marry someone who intentionally killed a child, even if the whole world annointed him as a hero. Just shame on Lebanon for letting such a creature get away with his murder.

• 6. ja3far | March 3rd, 2009 at 8:10 am

  lot of people were saying the same thing when strida married geagea

• 7. Elie.F | March 3rd, 2009 at 8:44 am

  I thought Kantar was married in Israel to a jewish girl, bas el mohimm YI3DOL.By the way doesn’t the wife looks like Bassem Feghali?

  What about freaky Elie Skaff and his beautiful wife Myriam?

  What about MONGO Sleiman Franjieh and the Beautiful Rima Karkafi?

  What about Jumblat and his wife NORA?

  What about the pussy Talal Mere3bi and his georgeous wife Wadad?

  And the list goes on and on and on ….

• 8. kezballah | March 3rd, 2009 at 8:57 am

  Ja3far and Elie. F very funny comments!

  But man this Zainab has the biggest chest I have ever seen! Kuntar can’t stop smiling!!

• 9. ja3far | March 3rd, 2009 at 9:03 am

  very big smile K.. very big smile

• 10. Afif | March 3rd, 2009 at 9:33 am

  hahaha he gets his 2342342 virgins
  arabs are oversexed woohoo

• 11. Ziad | March 3rd, 2009 at 9:39 am

  Who is Zainab Berjawi? What kind of reporter is she and is she a Druze like
  Kontar?

• 12. ja3far | March 3rd, 2009 at 10:11 am

  Ziad… Zainab is a TV show host in alalam tv ..
  below two links one containing pictures, and on containing report of one of her shows…
  kuwaitup.com/vb/showthread.php?t=59933
  alalam.ir/site/mokhtarat/tahtAlzo/tahtAlzo3.htm

  and i think she is shia

• 13. Waha Wera | March 3rd, 2009 at 11:16 am

  damn how does that woman stand up straight? shes gonna have some back troubles later

  and…………. wtf is that a real picture of that kunter guy? he looks like … umm… i got no idea what he looks like except damn hes one ugly mofo.

• 14. Arze | March 3rd, 2009 at 11:42 am

  Loooool ! 3anjad beauty & the beast !

  maybe Samir Kuntar after 30 years in jail has extra amunitions in addition to super se*ual powers that this girl finds interesting for the next 30 years !:D

• 15. paul | March 3rd, 2009 at 12:04 pm

  l7oub as3ab min 3addit kalb

• 16. paul | March 3rd, 2009 at 12:04 pm

  l7oub as3ab min 3addit chien

• 17. N10452 | March 3rd, 2009 at 1:46 pm

  She can launch katyoushyas out of those melons hahaha .. maybe thats why he married her ..

• 18. N10452 | March 3rd, 2009 at 1:49 pm

  Intriguing question though ya Kezballah:

  Who is this cute couple behind them on the wall ?? I like that sensual romantic love they are exchanging ..

  Iranian love is in the air ..

• 19. F.A | March 3rd, 2009 at 2:40 pm

  Ugly or not, while you all here are posting your comments, the beast is enjoying his prize and he doesn’t give a shit…

• 20. Rima | March 3rd, 2009 at 2:41 pm

  Sorry but Kuntar is a coward and a low class war criminal …

  Excuse my naivety, but when I think about the pain caused to this Israeli family by the monster Kuntar, I feel that this life is extremely unfair…Imagine he killed the father in front of his daughter and smacked the girl’s head on the rock with his rifle..caused the scared mother who was left at home to suffocate her…HELL WITH THIS LIFE! NOW KUNTAR THE IDIOT WILL GET MARRIED AND HAVE A FAMILY BUILT ON THE RUINS OF ANOTHER…SO PATHETIC!

• 21. ja3far | March 3rd, 2009 at 2:43 pm

  3aebilak paul

• 22. ja3far | March 3rd, 2009 at 2:44 pm

  wa 3aebil kil al chabeeb el 3ayzeen

• 23. kezballah | March 3rd, 2009 at 4:15 pm

  N, with those melons who can concentrate on anything else! I love our Lebanese women, the Christian and the Sunni and the Shia and all the other, each group has their style, even with the hijab she looks very pretty.

  I can’t get over Kuntar smile, he can’t believe he got her himself!!

  Rima, I am sometimes so tired of seeing injustice on all sides that all I can say is this the cr*ap world these Gods we believe created, I will try to do good as much as I can but I also want to have a smile every time I can…… If not I go crazy (that’s why I can not listen to Aoun, he will depress you like he is depressed)

• 24. THERESINIA | March 3rd, 2009 at 5:04 pm

  What if this “beast” has now become a spy with a new mission? A marriage could give him a better cover-up !

• 25. Midnifghtflower | March 3rd, 2009 at 5:08 pm

  What makes it weird if she really loves him? To her, he may be a hero, to us, a beast (Qalban wa Qaliban), as an old friend used to say: Kello relative!

• 26. Rami | March 3rd, 2009 at 9:40 pm

  LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL 3anjad a beast!!
  btw elie f, frangieh chabb 7elo:)

• 27. lebanese patriot | March 4th, 2009 at 12:38 am

  it seems tht all of you 14ers have the highest regard for israeli propoganda. everyone believes the zionist story of kantars imprisionment as if it were from gods lips. we all know how the zionist fabricate everything to demonize us arabs yet as long as they demonize someone that the 14ers dont like that its all right. and to RIMA, im really glad to hear that your heart goes out to the israelis that that have suffered. youre a very kind soul indeed even if youre naive and your loyalty is misplaced. why dont you feel for the thousands of PALESTINANS, LEBANESE(CHRISTIAN AND MUSLIM) AND OTHERS that have suffered from the israelis or are they not human (i.e. christian) enough for you. i truely hate all of you guys who blindly follow nassralla, gaegae, aoun, hariri and have no loyalty to your country. i know that you losers will attack me for writing this but you are all losers for following these corrupt personalities like blind sheep. you people will take orders from iran, syria, saudi, america, israel, france even if it means you turn your back on your fellow LEBANESE. none of you are truely for LEBANON. you are only for your sect, religion or political party. shame on you all for being phony patriots.

• 28. lebanese patriot | March 4th, 2009 at 1:44 am

  RIMA, READ THIS AND THEN TELL ME HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT ZIONIST SUFFERING

  “The film “Waltzing with Bashir” is being shown in some cities here in America. I didn’t want to see it on the big screen so I didn’t have to hear the “oohs and ahhs” of the sympathetic liberal crowd of—for example—Berkeley. More importantly, I didn’t want to pay one penny to an Israeli company. I have to say, after I went to see Steven Spielburg’s “Munich” with a leftist friend, I no longer saw her, except rarely. When the film ended, I wanted to go very far away from her, toward Anatolia. She tried to persuade me that Mr. Spielburg was a just man, that the film wasn’t biased against Arabs like others of its ilk from Hollywood. Do you want me to be happy just because we are depicted as half-human as opposed to animals? Have you read the memoirs of Abu Daoud [leader of the Black September group] before debating me? Is Spielburg aware that the Munich action came not from the [Palestinian] leadership but from the base, whose blood was boiling because of the on-going Israeli attacks on the Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon at the time? I spoke quickly, and my voice was raised and tense, and she thought she would calm my nerves. Who told her I wanted to be calmed? At the time of the Munich action, the Lebanese Army was under the shadow of…the Lebanese Army, and some of them got in touch with the Israeli enemy at that time, as Arab investigators have mentioned. Which is to say that some of the army was in the shadow of the enemy. I became angry with my friend, and the film came between us. I didn’t want to repeat it this time with anyone. I wanted to keep the anger and vituperation to myself. A friend thankfully came to me with a copy of the film from China (you can seek new films from China—long live piracy!). Some of us still boycott the usurping entity and the film is sponsored by Israeli embassies around the world, as the Guardian newspaper mentions, and it receives support from foundations of the enemy country while Tarek Mitri [Lebanon's Minister of Culture] mocks the boycott.
  But, I told my self, watching the film in an American theater would still be less painful than watching it in Beirut with a bunch of 14th of March intellectuals. I imagined them struggling to detect the human side of everything that issues forth from the enemy: these people—these liberals of Wahabiism, you know the type—try to convince Arab public opinion that everything that comes from the Israeli enemy—bombs, missiles, poems, songs, statements, insults, racism, hate—implies to some extent liberalism, humanism and a refined culture. They attempt in various and sundry ways to breathe into the enemy even the hint, the chimera of moderation and justice. These people who make comparisons, welcoming the fascism of the enemy, and say to you that there are alternatives even more extremist than what you see, or that their extremism stems from our extremism, as pronounced by Hazem Saghié (the “intellectual” guide of Saad and Nader Hariri), and repeated by Gisele Khoury (who interrupted Abu Ala` in an angry encounter and informed him that it’s not true that America always defends Israel. She “informed” him that Clinton put pressure on Netanyahu and even participated in his ousting). These people hang on the words of Amos Oz in order to convince Arab public opinion of the need for reconciliation with Israel. And when Oz goes silent, or when he speaks approvingly of killing and massacres, they remind you of that incomparable demonstration after the massacres of Sabra & Shatila, omitting the fact that the demonstration occurred for reasons relating solely to the Israeli elections, with no relationship to our victims of the massacres. These people await the stage entry of just one ashamed Israeli opposition figure so they can shout: “Look at Israeli democracy! Wow!”
  But, fortunately, I didn’t watch the film with these people, nor did I attend the film in Beirut in the presence of a Haaretz correspondent, as the paper recounted. The film, from its intellectual inception, reminds one of that painting of Renoir’s titled “The Mosque”, which I refer to as “The Bloc” (not to be confused with “The Middle Bloc” that the Maronite patriarch blesses, having been warned about the interference of religion in politics). In Renoir’s painting appear vague, indistinct figures, suggesting the muslim gathering for prayer. They are embodied by the ghost of Orientalism, where personal Arab or Muslim individuality is denied. They—the epistemological separation between us and them is a main part of the idea of Orientalism, as Edward Said made clear in the book “Orientalism”—are always human masses, crowded together with no boundaries between them. They call it “The Arab Street.” And this collective depiction serves to facilitate strikes against Arab and Muslim masses, as well as their torture, bombing, murder and colonization. There is no individuality for us in Renoir’s painting, nor in the film “Waltzing with Bashir.” The Arabs (whether victims or casualties or “terrorists”) pass through the film, presented as a mass without individuality or personality. They pass across the screen without speaking or appearing individually. They cross into view only fleetingly in order that the viewer won’t sense them and so as not to make a relationship between them and the viewer. Compare this to the viewer of the Israeli soldiers who don’t appear except as individuals.
  The film strives, as always happens in the liberal Zionist media, to introduce, up close, every soldier who appears in the film. You see the soldier as a child, helping his mother in the kitchen, you see him with his sweetheart, you see him sea-sick and vomiting, and there is nothing but for the viewer to lament and sympathize with the suffering Israeli murderer. There is a particular school in the Zionist Left that expresses its displeasure—nay, more—that some of the practices of Israeli wars and various aspects of the occupation are detrimental to “the Israeli spirit” or “the psychology of soldier.” In other words, for some of these people—like the thousands who demonstrated after the massacres of Sabra & Shatila—opposition to the slaughter came not out of sympathy with the victims or consciousness of the disaster that befell them, but out of support for the national (and, for some, even religious) fighting élan of the colonialist army. The humanization of the murderer and sympathy for him are both the flip side of the dehumanization of the Palestinian Other, for he is not a complete person in their view. Read Zionist literature from the beginning to find in their representation—if they were there at all—backward peasants or lowly bedouins or nondescript refugees without citizenship, later transformed into “saboteurs” (and this is the same name that the Phalangist “Voice of Lebanon” radio used in the course of the war) in the 1960s, until Zionist propaganda finally settled upon the description “terrorist”. The film doesn’t deviate from the formula, even with regard to that splendid boy when he fires an RPG launcher in the face of the occupier.
  But, the (im)moral standard of the film is evident from the beginning when the narrator suffers from nightmares because he killed some dogs in South Lebanon. And in another scene, an Israeli soldier bemoans the plight of the horses in Beirut’s hippodrome, for the animals are more valuable than the Arab according to a racial hierarchy that doesn’t differ in its essentials from Nazi hierarchy. There is a liberal American organization—which has been utterly indifferent to the lives of the people of Palestine—that ran a campaign to care for the animals in Gaza. The Arab and the Muslim in the liberal standard of the white man is of a lower rank than the animal. The Western viewer will sympathize with the Israeli soldier because he seemed the most affected by the killing of animals at the hands of the Arabs in the devastation of 1982.
  And then there is the most important thing. Why the Zionist focus on the massacre of Sabra & Shatila and not all the other massacres the Israeli aggressor committed in 1982, when it killed close to 20,000 Palestinians and Lebanese, most of whom were civilians? The reason is clear, and it has no connection to the atrocities the Lebanese forces committed among the massacres that fill any history of the Lebanese civil war. Israel wants, in its propaganda focus on Sabra & Shatila to the exclusion of others, to evade—not to assume—responsibility. And this is what Folman means in the propaganda hype for the film when he says, “Israeli soldiers had nothing to do with that massacre,” so Israel chose a massacre that was committed at the hands of its allies to remain at a distance from responsibility. Israel (and the film) wants to say that it did not carry out these heinous acts, even though Israel in the 1982 invasion killed many times the number of victims of that despicable massacre. The facile clichés of racial hatred are parroted over and over: that the Arabs kill in defense of “honor” and as a “show of force”, as if vengeance were not a quality of Zionism. Bashir Gemayel and his wife who fixed Lebanese meals for Ariel Sharon did not understand that, despite their claim to be “Phoenician”, Zionists look at them as Arabs, willy-nilly, no matter how much they pretended and no matter how much Amine Gemayel tried to appear sophisticated. The film passes over the breadth of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, intentionally omitting a number of stubborn facts. The film doesn’t want to mention, for instance, that Israel did not dare invade Beirut until after the elite fighters of the powerful Palestinian resistance were evacuated, and after the enemy [Israel] put thousands of women and children in concentration camps. But the film revealed what was hidden: that the soldiers of occupation were afraid of us. The boys in the camp of Ein el-Hilweh in Rashidiyah scared them. It can be said that we fell for the propaganda trick of 1948 to 2006. No one denies (except Wahhabi or Zionist propaganda—and they are allies these days) that the 2006 war put an end for eternity to the largest strategic component in the arsenal of the enemy: the power to intimidate and to sow the illusion of fearlessness on their own side. And if this component wasn’t eliminated, then why did the aggression on Gaza develop along the course they did, without a settlement in the enemy’s advantage? As the ideological defender of the Israeli soldier says: service in the army became a function of making a living. And for us, the opposite happened: the fighting is no longer done by people who practice it professionally to earn money, but rather by courageous volunteers and adherents to conviction (which appears as religious doctrine these days).
  And when you see the film, you should remember that painful time. Watch it in fury. I found myself scrutinizing the drawings of the enemy soldiers’ faces and asking myself: did I see one of these when I took refuge in the town of el-Qalila near Tyre in summer 1982? Did one of them stop me at their checkpoint? Did one of these participate in our morning assembly in the plaza of el-Qalila in order to isolate the “terrorists” among us, based on the suggestions of masked informants? And I found myself following the film in anger and rage as it attempted to re-write that era. Why didn’t the national movement deal early on with the emergence of the Phalange, which flourished since the 1950s (according to Hebrew sources) under the protection of the state of Israel? Why didn’t the Palestinian left and the non-Arafat wing of the Fatah movement deal with Yasser Arafat who did the impossible, to thwart the possibilities for the Lebanese and Palestinian revolution? It was possible to establish an effective resistance in South Lebanon in 1978 after the first invasion. At the time, the Iraqi [Marxist] Hashim Mohsin Ali set out to launch (and name) the Popular Resistance Front for the Liberation of Lebanon from the Occupation and Fascism, and he got in touch with Mohsin Ibrahim and George Hawi, but Arafat (who sponsored both) refused. He preferred to use Lebanon to negotiate the formation of the resistance factions. Thus, Arafat’s military appointments, such as Haj Ismail and Abu Zaim, were not without design. He planted corrupt people to thwart the resistance.
  It is painful to watch the film for those who can distinguish landmarks and streets and gardens. What are they doing on our land? The film wants you to sympathize with soldiers of the occupation and to forget that the occupiers of Palestine walk and wander in panicked fear on the occupied land of others. It is the occupation repeated and doubled. The film wants us to accept their occupation and feel only the pain of the witness to the murder of Palestinians at the hands of gangs from the Lebanese forces who arose and flourished and grew by a decision from Israel. But this Israeli insistence on separating the army of occupation from the forces of one Israeli man in Lebanon represents an evasion of direct responsibility for the invasion. Watch the film and remember that era and let the politicians of Lebanon run before your eyes. Remember those who collaborated with the occupation in those days. Bashir Gemayal was being threatened by Israeli forces but he was not destined to harvest the fruits of the hostility he fostered. And Samir Ja`ja` (Ga`ga` in Egyptian accent), leader of these gangs who slaughtered in Sabra & Shatila, is today looked to in the subject of Lebanon’s defense strategy. As for Solange [Gemayel], who told Sharon and his wife that she wanted them to be her first guest in the presidential palace in Baabda, she brought a hateful quartet alliance to the Lebanese parliament. And one of the leaders of the gangs in the Sabra & Shatila massacres (who, like Ja`ja`, received training and guidance from Israel), Elie Hobeika, transformed by Rafik Hariri and the Syrian regime and their allies into national leaders. And then there is Johnny Abdo, close companion since the early years of Rafiq Hariri, as recounted by Heikal and Abdullah AbuHabib. The smiling Johnny Abdo, who hosted Ariel Sharon in his home, when he was asked if army intelligence was during his time sending car bombs to West Beirut, replied that he would neither confirm nor deny. Hariri wanted to appoint him President, but before he ended up President, he was receiving (as Hassan Sabra recently reported) monthly payments of $350,000 (the builder of the modern state began construction by bribing the President of the Republic of Lebanon). The period of the Israeli invasion didn’t erase the memory of anyone who lived through it. Remember its details and preludes. How Lebanon’s little Hitler, Bashir Gemayel, made use of Israel to threaten his enemies among the Lebanese. When Bashir Gemayel learned of the order for Israel’s aggression—before anyone heard of “Shlomo Argov”—he summoned the [Lebanese state TV] anchor Arafat Hejazi to speak about the threat of “the decision”. After the end of filming, Gemayel persisted in loading Hejazi—as he told me later—with vulgar, obscene insults for [Prime Minister] Safik Wazzan, although he was an obedient tool in the hands of Elias Sarkis and Amin Gemayel after him. It is true that a number of militias committed the massacre, but the crimes of the Lebanese Forces were larger than the others 1) because they started the ethnic and sectarian cleansing, 2) they started the practice of killing based on [sectarian] identity, 3) they maintained relations with Israel since the 1950s, 4) they prepared for war and set it ablaze and insisted on its continuation and 5) they attempted to import the model of fascism—a Nazi regime in the land of cedar and oak. But all the ambitious projects were shattered on the rocks of their own factionalism. And the arms of the boys in the Ein el-Hilweh camp started a journey that has not ended. They allowed the extinction of the model of reckless military corruption that Arafat oversaw, and initiated actions of resistance against Israel since its formation.
  The film doesn’t want to speak of history. It doesn’t want to speak of suffering. Even when Zionist liberals touch upon suffering, they mean the suffering of the murderers. The nightmares of occupation soldiers are more important than the suffering of the victims of Sabra & Shatila. The soldiers speak of only their suffering, and don’t allow Arab victims to speak about their own suffering. The nightmares of occupation soldiers were more horrible than the killing of children in brutal Israeli bombardment before and after Sabra & Shatila.
  The film will win a number of awards. And the director will dialogue with a number of Arab liberals and will probably sign a document with Yasser Abed Rabbo in order to forget the past and enter into peace for Israel. And the prattling elites of the Saudi media will honor the film and consider it the pinnacle of human refinement. The film has been written about in Lebanon as though the events it portrays were takng place somewhere besides Lebanon. No one was in a hurry to say that the militia that committed the massacre in Sabra & Shatila is participating in the government with resistance factions in Lebanon. And unfortunately, there are those who want to convince us that the enemy is merciful and benevolent, and the demand for a return to truce agreement is a (il)logical concession, that Israel is but a gentle lamb in our land. And there is the rushing to judgement about the film and hastening to the opinion that director Folman is a “resistance fighter” who condemns Israel’s wars. He did no such thing—on the contrary, he depicted Israeli officers interfering to stop the massacres, as though the invasion of Lebanon that year included but one massacre. Bashir Habib writes in a Hariri publication that the film is a “bold and courageous act”. Satia Nur ad-Din was among the few Arab authors who expressed skepticism of the film’s propaganda about itself and about the alleged courage of the director.
  But Lebanon has closed the book from that era and Israel’s enemies in Lebanon proceed to impose a design to establish an entity alligned with the jewish state. Those of us who see the film return in memory to a slogan buried by time after the massacre of Ein el-Rammanah: the slogan “isolation of the Phalange” that was appropriate from its first application, and Kamal Jumblatt was killed because he was convinced—after all—of the benefit of the decisive military option with the Phalanges. But Yasser Arafat and the Syrian regime did not want the military option, and the lack of recourse to the military option that spring postponed the end of the Lebanese civil war and let pass a historical opportunity to establish a secular democratic system (a real one, not the Hariri version more befitting Saudi Arabia) in the heart of the Arab world. If the latter had been achieved, it would have been possible for Lebanon to counter the Israeli aggressions that continued daily since 1948, and Lebanon’s borders would have offered much greater resistance.
  The Lebanese minister of culture—and he dreams of becoming Hariri’s higher censor of the Lebanese media—scoffs at the idea of the boycott of Israel, and said in a statement to foreign press that one can maybe watch the film on the internet. Despite Mitri’s knowledge of the existence of the internet—and this is a good thing—the notion of the boycott is a principled notion—perhaps the notion of principleness defies the comprehension abilitities of the Lebanese minister of culture—and an economic one as well. Surely, allowing the film to be presented will accrue financial profits to an Israeli company that will promote—with the minister’s knowledge or his ignorance—Zionist standards. In the mud of the electoral battle in Israel, Ehud Barak rebuked his opponent Lieberman for not having killed—as he himself had—Arabs with his own hands. Is Tarek Mitri in need of a lesson in the history of Zionism to understand the reason for Arab public opinion’s deep belief in the need for the boycott, at the very least? Or is it that a condition of Lebanon’s entry into the World Trade Organization (which preoccupied Rafik Hariri) is the complete renunciation of the boycott?”

• 29. ja3far | March 4th, 2009 at 8:58 am

  lebanese Patriot… Assad Abou Khalil is the king…

• 30. Ziad | March 4th, 2009 at 9:28 am

  Patriot and Ja3far,
  You want to open the Lebanese war files you are most welcome, but picking up a one-sided article from a highly biased individual and using it as pure fact is certainly not the way. Just I will give you 3 simple FACTS which many of readers don;t know about:
  1. The Qaa Christian village was attacked and massacred( this is the first Qaa massacre cose their is a second one) on April 14, 1975, one day after the April 13 incident.
  2.The first civilian real massacre was in Beit Mellat in the summer of 75 by the Syrian-backed Saeqa ( The irony hear is that this massacre and many others was always used by Aoun prior to 2005 to demonstrate that Syria was behind the civil war in Lebanon, his famous theory on the psycho fireman).
  3.The first ID kidnapping was done in Nabaa by a Shia movement under the name of Fitian Ali (headed by Ahmad Safwan of Nabaa) in May 1975 and the kidnapped individual was blown-up by dinamiting him in his a-h, and he was from the Mubarak family.
  Notice here that I am not talking Damour massacre,Achrafieh destruction in 78,and many other big-gun stories.So if the writer in 28.above is stating facts, here I mentioned 3 small, yet symbolic incidents that show the many “other sides” of the story which we can go debating for years and years.So please, spare us the war files as this will come back to haunt each and every Lebanese,Syrian and Phalestinian.

• 31. ja3far | March 4th, 2009 at 9:44 am

  Ziad… I like assad bou khalil because he attaks all lebanese politicians ( ok M8 less then M14 but no wonder why ) …
  but what you are describing as facts and first events based on your sources are not in other sources, and it is very easy to prove that using western writters books not lebanese ones.. and there is plenty of them…
  i have always avoided going in such usless debates and i will still do …

• 32. Carl in Jerusalem | March 4th, 2009 at 12:30 pm

  Anyone know how old this woman is?

  She’s obviously over 9, which is better than usual….

• 33. Fuziyad | March 4th, 2009 at 1:39 pm

  Lebanese patriot, would you mind naming the march8 intellectual who wrote the stupid article above?

• 34. ja3far | March 4th, 2009 at 2:05 pm

  walawe Fuziad.. u havent heard of asaad bou Khalil? the M14 “intelectuals” were making big fuss about him, especialy when he started criticising journalists like sayegh Anyway he is not M8, he is a real yassar, not like many who have identity crises… his biography is summerised as below:

  As’ad AbuKhalil, born March 16, 1960. From Tyre, Lebanon, grew up in Beirut. Received his BA and MA from American University of Beirut in pol sc. Came to US in 1983 and received his PhD in comparative government from Georgetown University. Taught at Tufts University, Georgetown University, George Washington University, Colorado College, and Randolph-Macon Woman’s College. Served as a Scholar-in-Residence at Middle East Institute in Washington DC. He served as free-lance Middle East consultant for NBC News and ABC News, an experience that only served to increase his disdain for maintream US media. He is now professor of political science at California State University, Stanislaus and visiting professor at UC, Berkeley. His favorite food is fried eggplants.

  you can find the above and lot of real educational stuff on his web site :
  angryarab.blogspot.com

• 35. Fuziyad | March 4th, 2009 at 2:20 pm

  Ja3far his article is real bs, hiding behind yassari arguments to justify censorship won’t get him far…khalli y tahher ni3o before talking of Giséle Khoury or Tarek Mitri…

  PS: i didn’t like waltz with bashir at all, I agree with his analysis that the movie blames everything on the horrible christian lebanese…just like him and his idols usually do…man they are sooooo similar…

• 36. ja3far | March 4th, 2009 at 2:39 pm

  Fuziad… Al hakika btijrah

• 37. Fuziyad | March 4th, 2009 at 3:30 pm

  al hakika?? he he just did some reaserch on the guy and even found a picture of him…I think his aspect speaks for itself, the man has lost it…

• 38. ja3far | March 4th, 2009 at 3:47 pm

  i gave u his web site .. his picture is there..it wouold have saved u the effort

• 39. Fuziyad | March 4th, 2009 at 4:04 pm

  quite funny, is long curly hair well accepted in the theocracy he admires so much?

• 40. ja3far | March 4th, 2009 at 4:22 pm

  why did you stereotype him ? be careful you are becoming what you criticise the others to be… not every one who pin point your mistakes is with the other group…
  i advice you to read some of the articles he wrote their… an intersting man

• 41. Fuziyad | March 4th, 2009 at 5:07 pm

  yes ja3far I think that a university teacher with long hair who supports the middle eastern fascist bi koun chwai mach3out…

  This doesn’t mean that I would like him to burn in hell because he has long hair…bit different…

  and how is he not with the other group? which mistakes is he pin pointing? why all this hatred against someone like Gisèle Khoury? come on…I found an interview of him with the newspaper “al ahram” where he says that all the lebanese society got “phalangised” ha, that one is nice? is it madness? stupidity or bad faith?

  I have to look more into his blog, must be some funny theories in…

• 42. ili | March 4th, 2009 at 5:37 pm

  Did she test if he can still make an erection… coz personnally i doubt it coz i’m sure the israelis ma keno ykhallou “y2ebb raso” if you know what i mean…

  Guys seriously we should congratulate him on this Bitchch he can’t bang, and her on the beast who can barely take a pee (i’m optimistic)

• 43. lebanese patriot | March 5th, 2009 at 5:24 am

  fuziyad,
  the article was intended to point out the racist zionist and how they are humanized in the media and how us arabs are demonized. however, your only concern is who the messenger is to see if you can accept it as a plausible analysis. heaven forbid that you should agree with someone who is not of your party/sect. even when the topic is someone who is our common enemy, you are so blinded by your racism, prejudices, politics, ignorance, religion etc. etc. that you would a side with someone who would you just as quickly bomb your house as a HA house. i am niether a 14er or 8er as the way i see it is that you guys are different sides of the same coin. indeed, you guys are more alike that you realise and want to admit. however, i am open minded enough th visit blogs of the 14ers and 8ers. i am not stupid enough to believe that either of you are 100% wrong. each one of you have some points that are right. otherwise. i would not visit either of your blogs. i am mature enough to realise and admit this. i think that if the 14ers and 8ers looked at each others suffering and opposing viewpoint than maybe we could do better at being fellow countrymen.
  by the way, who gives a damn about the guy and his wife. for those who are wasting their time on commenting, i really feely sorry for you people. like he really cares about what you think. why dont you do something constructive instead of critizing and spreading more hatred and division.

• 44. Fuziyad | March 5th, 2009 at 11:34 am

  Ya lebanese patriot, I would love to have the same maturity as you but I have my limited capacities and I try and live with it..sorry…

  Concerning your article ,it didn’t bring and new ideas to me, I knew israel was evil, I knew spileberg was jewish, I knew some jewish were not extremist ect…I have seen the movie analysed it and I also allready have an opinion on the idea of boycott of israeli products…and btw am part of an association that defends Palestinian rights and that organized campaigns and lobbying on boycott of fruits and vegetables produced in Israeli setllements….

  So what interested me in yr article is how this man links all this to the lebanese internal scene (he did it, not me) and insults respected personnalities with some hatred that made me thaught he knew them personnally as we felt deep resentment in his writings… thus I wanted to know who that man is and found indeed that he probably knew personnaly and from long time ago the people he was insulting…that what I wanted to know, the rest I allready knew.

  Tks lebanese patriot and plse stay mature, ma 3anna ktir metlak…

• 45. Michele | March 6th, 2009 at 12:10 am

  Jaafar, setrida was at least wearing white at jet wedding not black?

  Shoo ya Rami? Do u fancy Frangiieh?

• 46. Michele | March 6th, 2009 at 12:18 am

  Jaafar, setrida was at least wearing white at her wedding not black?

  Shoo ya Rami? Do u fancy Frangiieh?

• 47. paul | March 6th, 2009 at 11:50 am

  ja3far,@21 , do you have another Zeinab

• 48. Cartman | March 6th, 2009 at 6:33 pm

  Rima…

  honestly, how fat and depressed are you that you can’t be a little lighthearted for once about a HUMOR post, and had to rewind history 30 years and dig out graves.
  assuming jadalan that he did what he did as you repeat it, with the little girl and the rock and the propaganda and all the bullshit,
  he spent 30 f**king years in prison, and ISRAEL WILLINGLY released him,
  2ooli ma3i,
  israel let him go,
  israel let him go,
  israel let him go,
  israel let him go,
  ………..
  get a life Rima, take a yoga class or smoke a joint.
  chill the f**ck out.

• 49. Rima | March 7th, 2009 at 1:45 pm

  Cartman sweetie I wonder who is fat and depressed! By the way, if you are interested to know I excercise on a regular basis and take good care of myself.
  I honestly beleive that Kuntar is a criminal whether he killed israelis or syrians and whether the crime took place a few days ago or thirty years ago. It will make no difference!
  Cheers

• 50. Rima | March 7th, 2009 at 1:57 pm

  Lebanese Patriot

  I don’t see why some people think that criminality against Israelis is legitimate criminality. What Kuntar did was an intentional attack on a small child…He could have spared the life of the child…that is all!

  At least he shouldn’t be treated as a hero coz he never fought Israeli soldiers or bases. In my view he is a coward. Regarding the Israel v the Arabs, I assure you this is no more than a myth .

  Cheers

• 51. readers | March 9th, 2009 at 9:21 pm

  same Samir G. and his wife

• 52. lebanese patriot | March 9th, 2009 at 10:46 pm

  rima,
  your missing my point. why do you blindly believe what the zionist media report. dont you know that they will report anything to make us look like animals. they make things up all the time and you know this. maybe kuntar did indeed kill that child. maybe he killed 100 children. my point is that he said he didnt and they said he did. so who to believe. they both have an interest in telling their side of the story. and if i have to believe one or the other, then i will probably believe one of my own. although suicide bombers in the past have killed innocent children, i dont know of any who needlessly killed a child if it wasnt a suicide mission(i could be wrong). furthermore rima, by allying yourself with the 14ers who have allied with the u.s. who are allies of the zionist, you are by default allying yourself with the bastards who killed 1500 lebanese and 1300 palestinians in their last two wars. many of those dead were children that you feel so strongly for. remember that the u.s. encouraged the zionist th continuue the bombings while the rest of the world was pushing for a ceasefire. they wanted the zionist to finish off ha and hamas even though they knew that innocents were being slaughtered. if you want to ally yourself with those bastards that you share some of the blame for their actions and have to defend them. screw 14ers and 8ers. neither represent LEBANON. but, i know that allying with them means allying with their allys and those allys are only looking out for their interest.

• 53. Rima | March 10th, 2009 at 3:59 am

  Leik ya patriot where do you live in the moon…ya 3ayni haydeh siyesseh…I will probably expand on this issue in a later post…Just relax and don’t see things from one perspective.
  Cheers

• 54. lebanese patriot | March 10th, 2009 at 7:02 am

  im not talking siyesseh. im talking abouting truth and facts. politics is one thing and reporting facts is another. why do i waste my time………….

• 55. lebanese patriot | March 10th, 2009 at 7:03 am

  im not talking siyesseh. im talking abouting truth and facts. politics is one thing and reporting facts is another. why do i waste my time………………

Leave a Reply

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed